Q5/SQ5 MKI (8R) Discussion Discussion forum for the First Generation Audi Q5 SUV produced from 2008 to 2017

US: what year was adaptive cruise first offered?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-23-2022, 09:23 AM
  #11  
AudiWorld Member
 
Jcampbell3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 244
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SMac770
Well, Audi has to CYA, being a corporation. But I can see the general concern. If you run the basic setting to calibrate the radar system based on how the car points as it drives "straight" down the road, and then change the rear toe thus changing possibly the thrust angle, ie the angle the car points as it drives "straight" down the road, the system should be recalibrated to make sure it's still looking "straight ahead" and not "the next lane over", depending on how far down the road it's evaluating. But an alignment done doesn't mean they needed to change the rear toe per se, or resulted in any net thrust angle change. Again, there's "good enough to get by usually", and then there's safeguarding against litigation.
but if the radar has never been changed from the factory setting I would think that putting the alignment back to straight would improve the setting ND PERFORMANCE of the radar. It makes no sense to me that the radar performance follows the misalignment between the two. It’s more ov a PYA on their part. Mine works fine no error codes etc.thanks for the reply.
Old 11-23-2022, 03:12 PM
  #12  
AudiWorld Super User
 
SMac770's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Georgia
Posts: 9,341
Received 1,931 Likes on 1,640 Posts
Default

There's no absolute in an alignment; it's all a bunch of variables that only have to be within a spec range. I could set all my toes a bit left and the car will drive "straight" but tilted (thrust angle off from absolute 0). So maybe the car was slightly thrust left and now it's slightly thrust right. But still "within spec". It doesn't seem to have been an issue for you this time, ok. But a corporation cannot write procedures based on "that one time that everything just seemed to work out". There is a legit scenario of errant operation following an alignment, and the only process to ensure that is not the case is to follow the alignment with a calibration. Also part of the reason I'm happy to not have a B9. All the assistance systems that need recalibration, alignments are $600 jobs now, and pretty much only the dealership is likely to have all the necessary toys.
Old 11-23-2022, 05:31 PM
  #13  
AudiWorld Member
 
Jcampbell3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 244
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SMac770
There's no absolute in an alignment; it's all a bunch of variables that only have to be within a spec range. I could set all my toes a bit left and the car will drive "straight" but tilted (thrust angle off from absolute 0). So maybe the car was slightly thrust left and now it's slightly thrust right. But still "within spec". It doesn't seem to have been an issue for you this time, ok. But a corporation cannot write procedures based on "that one time that everything just seemed to work out". There is a legit scenario of errant operation following an alignment, and the only process to ensure that is not the case is to follow the alignment with a calibration. Also part of the reason I'm happy to not have a B9. All the assistance systems that need recalibration, alignments are $600 jobs now, and pretty much only the dealership is likely to have all the necessary toys.

I still don't' believe that the "radar alignment" follows an "out of wheel alignment" how would that happen? there is no linkage that i am aware of unless of course it's been hit or otherwise damaged. so regardless, you can do whatever you want to the alignment, but unless the radars alignment has changed you are only improving the vehicles tracking and hence the radars inherent alignment. yyou would certainly know from the ACC if that was the case. I just can't get my head around anything other than the above. paying 6-800 bucks would be my last alternative and
i would need evidence that the radar unit had moved and need adjustment.

cheers
Old 11-23-2022, 10:22 PM
  #14  
AudiWorld Super User
 
SMac770's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Georgia
Posts: 9,341
Received 1,931 Likes on 1,640 Posts
Default

The radar unit is fixed to the lock carrier, it's not "moving". So if the angle the car points down the road shifts, the thrust angle, the radar unit is no longer looking in the same absolute direction. I don't think you're grasping what thrust angle is. The same recalibration is necessary, so they say, if you dismount the lock carrier (service position), which really sucks. There's no guarantee the lock carrier will sit just the same when you resecure it (really surprised how much play there is in how the lock carrier can be resecured).
Old 11-25-2022, 11:07 AM
  #15  
AudiWorld Member
 
Jcampbell3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 244
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Oh I fully understand what thrust angle is, have seen it on many pickups “crabing their way down the highway” over my 70 years. What you are not understanding is if the radar carrier has not moved from the factory any improvements made to a general 4 wheel alignment only makes things much better. It simple physics. In my case the alignment was off and the thrust angle slightly out in the rear, that does not automatically mean a realignment of the fixed radar housing. It makes no sense at all.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
thomasaquinas
Q5/SQ5 MKII Discussion
10
12-18-2021 09:30 AM
Bada Bing
A4 (B9 Platform) Discussion
6
01-19-2021 01:51 PM
Bryan Meyerovich
Q7 MKII Discussion
1
03-05-2019 05:24 PM
Sherpa
A4 (B7 Platform) Discussion
2
10-01-2005 12:12 PM
clemens21
A4 (B7 Platform) Discussion
3
06-20-2005 04:40 PM



Quick Reply: US: what year was adaptive cruise first offered?



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:35 AM.